Displaying 17 results for

Ripple Effect: What USPSTF Recommendations Mean for State and Territorial Health Law What USPSTF Recommendations Mean for State and Territorial Health Law Andy Baker-White This Health Policy Update highlights how U.S. states and territories are using policy to codify important public health recommendations. The United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) is a volunteer panel of national experts that issues evidence-based letter-grade recommendations on clinical preventive services. Under the Affordable Care Act, services with an A or B grade must be covered by most private health insurance plans without cost-sharing, with similar requirements for Medicaid enrollees and Medicare beneficiaries. An estimate by the Department of Health and Human Services concluded that in 2020, these services reached approximately 264 million Americans. States and territories implement these recommendations through statutes and rules. ASTHO identified over 200 state and territorial laws referencing the USPSTF, including in insurance statutes, Medicaid rules, disease-specific laws, and state employee health plan requirements. Over the past year, the stability of USPSTF recommendations has come into question. The U.S. Supreme Court's June 2025 ruling in Kennedy v. Braidwood confirmed the HHS Secretary’s authority to block USPSTF recommendations and remove task force members. News reports in July 2025 indicated that HHS Secretary Kennedy intended to remove all USPSTF members, and in May 2026 fired the chair and vice-chair of the task force. Questions are being raised about whether USPSTF recommendations will be rescinded or downgraded and, if so, what the impact would be on states and territories. In addition, if the USPSTF fails to convene in the future, it cannot review newer data on preventive services, meaning existing recommendations could become outdated and USPSTF can’t make recommendations for new services. To meet these challenges, states and territories are taking steps to ensure the continued scientific basis for preventive health services within their own law. Dynamic References to USPSTF Recommendations States and territories often use dynamic references to USPSTF recommendations in regulating health plan coverage of preventive services. This allows the jurisdiction to automatically require coverage for the most current USPSTF recommendations. Laws in West Virginia (state employee health plans), Oregon (regulated health plans), Hawaii (health director standing orders), and Alaska (adult Medicaid enrollees) use this approach. While dynamic references allow jurisdictions to stay up to date with the recommendations, if the task force withdraws any guidance, then those preventive services would no longer require no-cost coverage without additional action from those jurisdictions. Some jurisdictions address this by specifying that certain USPSTF guidance changes will not apply. For example, Guam’s law requires continued no-cost coverage for colorectal cancer screenings and authorizes the health director to adjust diabetes screening recommendations if USPSTF recommendations cease. Illinois specifies that the 2009 USPSTF recommendations for breast cancer screening and mammography are not to be considered current because national medical bodies created differing recommendations for screening. Another way jurisdictions avoid the unpredictability of using dynamic references is locking in the date of the USPSTF recommendations that are used for coverage requirements. For example, Massachusetts requires its state employee health plan to cover USPSTF A and B recommendations that were in effect by July 1, 2023. Using a version of USPSTF recommendations from a specific date maintains a base level of coverage regardless of future changes, though adopting new recommendations or removing outdated recommendations would require separate action. During this year’s legislative sessions, several states enacted or proposed legislation to remove dynamic USPSTF references. For example, Maryland passed legislation (HB 637 and SB 385) to lock in the USPSTF A and B recommendations that were in effect on December 31, 2024. Washington enacted HB 2242 requiring coverage of USPSTF A and B recommendations in effect on June 30, 2025, as well as recommendations adopted by the state insurance commissioner. A bill passed in Delaware, HB 338, would require the use of the USPSTF recommendations from January 1, 2025. Overall, however, neither dynamic nor fixed references to USPSTF recommendations address how jurisdictions can keep up with new scientific data and advances in preventive services in the absence of ongoing USPSTF review and recommendations. To fill this need, some states have enacted legislation that creates processes for reviewing data and establishing recommendations. For example, the new Maryland law mentioned above also authorizes the state’s health secretary to adopt preventive service recommendations that have not been recommended by or that differ from USPSTF. The new process requires notice and a 30-day comment period, an analysis by the Maryland Health Care Commission, and citations to the authoritative medical body upon which the recommendation is based. Disease-Specific Statutes: USPSTF Grades as Care Standards and Thresholds Many states also use USPSTF grades as thresholds for specific preventive services, establishing the standard of care, or issuing standing orders. For example, Arkansas law defines "follow-up colonoscopy" by reference to a colorectal screening assigned an A or B grade by the USPSTF, while Nevada’s law directs primary care providers to use criteria set out in USPSTF recommendations to screen adult women for BRCA mutations. In Hawaii, the state health director is authorized to issue public health standing orders for current USPSTF A and B recommended services, and in Idaho the law uses USPSTF guidance for applying ocular antibiotic prophylaxis to newborns as the standard for medical practice in the state. Some states are considering legislation to distance preventive service coverage requirements from USPSTF recommendations. For example, while New Jersey's current law requires no-cost coverage for colorectal cancer screenings in accordance with the method and frequency recommended by the USPSTF, introduced legislation (A4916 and S4254) would remove the reference to USPSTF recommendations and instead authorize one screening per year for persons aged 33 or older. More broadly, Hawaii considered legislation (HB 1898 and SB 3133) that would have authorized the state’s health department to “make recommendations relating to clinical preventive service recommendations of the [USPSTF] Force that have been assigned a grade of A or B as of July 1, 2025” and require no-cost coverage for the department’s recommendations. However, this legislation did not pass. State Employee Benefit Plans USPSTF recommendations may also be used to establish preventive health services covered by state employee health plans. A West Virginia statute requires the state’s employee health plans to cover mammograms consistent with "current guidelines from the United States Preventive Services Task Force," while the health plan document further states that preventive services are "subject to change as USPSTF…recommendations are updated.” In Ohio, a regulation requires state employee health benefits include all USPSTF-recommended tobacco cessation services and authorizes the state health director to update covered services if USPSTF guidance changes. Missouri law requires full coverage of USPSTF graded A and B recommended prescription and prescribed over-the-counter drugs for state plan members. The Path Forward USPSTF recommendations have helped millions of Americans receive critical health services at no cost, and states and territories have built practices, programs, and standards on that foundation. From adopting fixed-date references to establishing state-level recommendation authority to creating new state review bodies, legislative activity this year reflects a broad effort to address ripple effects from potential future changes to or lack of USPSTF guidance. Health officials may be asked to assess their jurisdiction’s laws and their use of USPSTF recommendations, and coordinate with insurance commissioners, Medicaid directors, and employee benefits administrators to confirm consistent agency interpretation and identify where action is needed. ASTHO will continue to monitor these policies as they develop. article yes

Public health leaders are positioned to prevent illness from the "tripledemic” of COVID-19, Influenza, and RSV with approved vaccines and preventative antibody treatments.

Each year, ASTHO tracks and analyzes key legislation that impacts public health, and highlights the emerging trends for our members. While the bulk of the tracked legislation arises in state legislatures, ASTHO also follows legislation from the territories and Freely Associated States, jurisdictions collectively referred to as the insular areas. The insular areas often face different challenges than the states, while also sharing many common concerns. This post contains a brief look at some of the public health related legislation introduced in the insular areas during their current legislative sessions.

Strengthening Leadership, Risk Communications, and Preparedness in the Islands Strengthening Public Health Preparedness in the Islands Sidnie Christian, Alyssa Boyea Key strategies in on leadership, risk communications, and preparedness, can help island jurisdictions prepare for and respond to emerging public health threats. ASTHO convened a two-day, in-person workshop in Honolulu from June 25 – 26, bringing together public health preparedness staff from American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, the Federated States of Micronesia, Guam, Hawaiʻi, the Republic of the Marshall Islands (RMI), and Palau, as well as federal partners from CDC, the Department of Homeland Security, and the Administration for Strategic Preparedness and Response. The workshop focused on leadership and workforce development, risk communications, administrative preparedness, and more to support island areas as they prepare for and respond to natural disasters and other emerging public health threats, of which emerged key learnings that can benefit all island jurisdictions. Leadership and Workforce Development Leading through change requires transparency, trust, and collaboration. Planned change involves assessing readiness for change, identifying resources needed, securing buy-in, and determining a path forward. However, sometimes change can leave little to no time for preparation. Island jurisdictions have encountered challenges in the face of change, with many workshop participants sharing firsthand challenges around retaining institutional knowledge, infrastructure, and receiving assistance from the mainland United States in a timely fashion. As such, change readiness, succession planning, and effective change management practices are of utmost importance in the islands. Key recommendations and takeaways include: Utilizing a reputable framework, such as Kotter 8-Step Change Model, is pivotal for improving change readiness and change management. Change management frameworks and methods can assist with different types of change including structural change, strategic operational change, people-centric change, etc. Trust is hard to build, but easy to lose. Participants spoke about characteristics of high trust relationships including open communication, consistency, good judgement or expertise, and cultural sensitivity, while low trust relationships characteristics include lack of communication, inconsistency, and lack of teamwork. Succession planning is important to ensure institutional knowledge and capabilities remain in the wake of staff turnover or retirement. Identifying the necessary expertise, skills, and capabilities for each role is vital in the case of unplanned changes in staffing. Promising practices include annual review of critical positions, conducting talent calibration sessions, defining action plans, and obtaining buy-in from leadership and relevant partners. Risk Communications The island jurisdictions face emergencies that require creative response efforts. Both Hawaiʻi and RMI demonstrated innovative approaches in risk communications during COVID-19, finding success in forming critical partnerships, utilizing trusted voices within the community, and bridging communication gaps: Hawaiʻi utilized social media to showcase individuals such as doctors, pastors, social media influencers, and even local sports teams getting vaccinated, and utilized trusted voices to deliver messages. Additionally, they translated their materials into three languages (Marshallese, Samoan, and Hawaiʻian), modeling that no one gets forgotten, the true meaning of “ohana.” RMI created a working group with a mix of partners that curated press releases, educational materials, and sitreps, and served as a liaison between RMI Ministry of Health and Human Services and the community. It also partnered with several media outlets (e.g., radio stations, local papers, and other private sectors) and utilized mass text messaging to spread information quickly. The latter proved to resonate with most island jurisdictions who struggle with staying connected to hard-to-reach populations, namely those in more rural and disconnected communities. RMI was able to connect with these populations through WhatsApp to keep them updated throughout the COVID-19 response. Administrative Preparedness Improving administrative preparedness plans and processes ensure timely and efficient access to needed resources for a public health response. Most workshop participants are currently in the process of updating existing administrative preparedness plans, while some are working with other departments to create and implement new plans. Attendees discussed key partnerships for collaboration including other departments, Medical Reserve Corps, and other volunteer organizations. One common key challenge that emerged was around staffing (e.g., finding qualified people to fill vacancies, hiring process issues, making sure positions are competitive, etc.). To address this issue, island jurisdictions can work closely with other departments or jurisdictional agencies to streamline current processes, establish memorandums of understanding with different partners/facilities to assist with emergency procurement, and ensuring staffing vacancies are competitive and match public health classifications. Disease Forecasting A survey on state and territorial expertise and needs for infectious disease forecasts, models, and other outbreak analytic techniques—implemented by ASTHO with support from CDC’s Center for Forecasting and Outbreak Analytics—revealed that respondents from island jurisdictions experienced several barriers that led to limited use of infectious disease forecasts to inform communication and decision making. Challenges noted include limited software access, limited disease modeling capacity or skills, and lack of uniform reporting systems. Through a discussion-based exercise, workshop participants shared their challenges and considerations for ASTHO and CDC to assist with disease forecasting in the island jurisdictions moving forward. Challenges include but are not limited to: Delays with sending samples to labs and receiving results in a timely manner. Without timely results, it is challenging to take swift action. Lack of staff / staff wearing many hats with limited capacity. In most cases, there is no specific communication plan for disease forecasting within the departments. Communication can be challenging without clear processes and channels. Participants noted the desire for additional disease forecasting training and opportunities for collaboration. They suggested an integrated training session with island epidemiologists and other relevant staff to enhance disease forecasting knowledge and communication, as well as strengthen collaboration. Preparing for and Responding to Climate Events From hurricanes to typhoons to volcanic eruptions, the island jurisdictions are no strangers to the effects of changing climate. Willliam “Brandon” Aydlett, science and operations officer at the National Weather Service, and Shelbi Davis, Senior Analyst on the Environmental Health team at ASTHO, offer the following recommendations to island jurisdictions for preparing and responding to unprecedented climate events, as discussed with workshop participants: Create or update standard operating procedures for various climate related responses unique to the island. Always prepare for a category higher storm than is expected. Consider conducting regular vulnerability assessments to better understand areas where the island or its people may be most susceptible to adverse health impacts from climate events. Jurisdictions can learn from one another and find a sense of camaraderie in their preparedness efforts, much like the workshop participants. For example, one island jurisdiction noted that they currently do not have a warehouse to store equipment but are working on a plan to secure one; another jurisdiction, having recently revamped their warehouse, noted that they could assist their island neighbor in this endeavor and provide lessons learned as well as strategies to help secure a warehouse that will fit their needs. Looking Toward the Future Sharing lessons learned with one another and reflecting on how to apply those learnings in respective communities is crucial. Workshop participants shared their intent to share and utilize resources and information shared throughout the workshop with their leadership and team to begin implementing in their jurisdictions, as well as using strategies and skills learned to enhance partnerships. To all the participants and our Hawaiʻian hosts, we say mahalo. Related Resources Modernizing Infrastructure and Facilities for Readiness and Response | ASTHO PH-HERO Workforce Resource Center | ASTHO ASTHO STAR Center | ASTHO Evidence-Based Strategies to Enhance Public Health Emergency Preparedness and Response | JPHMP article yes

As COVID spread through the country and infection rates rose in every state, many of the the U.S. Affiliated Pacific Islands (USAPI) received media attention for remaining relatively COVID-free. The USAPI’s unified response in the face of a global pandemic is a history-making tale of collaboration, communication, and partnership. The successes of public health leaders provide important lessons for preventing, preparing for, and responding to future public health emergencies.

The COVID-19 pandemic has exasperated challenges around access to nutritious and affordable foods. In response, the federal government has taken action to increase funding and access to programs to strengthen food security.

The 2020 holiday season is coinciding with a nationwide surge of COVID-19 cases. With great concern that holiday travel to see loved ones may exacerbate community spread of the virus, many states are increasing public health measures before the winter holiday season. As of November 16, 2020, 13 states and D.C. had a quarantine requirement for out-of-state travelers. The U.S. territories also have instituted travel restrictions to limit the spread of COVID-19.

The COVID-19 pandemic presented an opportunity for an existing behavioral health resource—the Guam Behavioral Health and Wellness Center’s Crisis Hotline—to become a household name. During the pandemic, the hotline became a lifeline for a community in crisis greatly in need of information.

ASTHO has several members from the territories and Freely Associated States—jurisdictions with unique challenges, and do not fall under the category of a state or federal district. This post is a brief look at some of the public health related legislation introduced during recent legislative sessions.

In the late fall of 2021, ASTHO leadership visited select jurisdictions in the Pacific and the Atlantic for the first time since COVID-19 curtailed travel to these regions. It was a fantastic to reconnect with our leadership and dedicated staff. Unsurprisingly, we heard about the jurisdictions’ challenges, including chronic ones related to funding and infrastructure, as well as new challenges resulting from the global pandemic.

Several states and territories, as well as many local governments, are going beyond recommendations and requiring individuals to wear face coverings when they are in public settings and spaces (i.e. grocery stores, retail stores, restaurants, public and private transportation services, parks, etc.). Ongoing research and evidence suggests the relationship between mandatory face coverings and declines in daily COVID-19 growth rates is statistically significant.

Public health plays a vital role to ensure the safety of all attendees, prevent dangerous infectious disease outbreaks, and prepare for any potential threats. Learn about the work Guam did to prepare for the 2016 Festival of Pacific Arts.

This blog describes the island areas COVID-19 successes and their cultural and historical context.

This blog shares key takeaways from the first Island Areas COVID-19 Health Equity Action Institutes.

This Health Policy Update is an overview of policy strategies that states have taken at the executive and legislative levels to increase the healthcare workforce to more effectively and efficiently respond to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Learn how Guam is collaborating with other U.S.-affiliated pacific islands to prevent infectious disease outbreaks.

While largely preventable, healthcare-associated infections are the most common complication of hospital care, are a leading cause of death in the United States, and increased significantly during the pandemic. States have proposed legislation to strengthen and sustain infection prevention capacity, implement requirements for data tracking and reporting through national surveillance systems, and prioritize antimicrobial stewardship.